Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 05:37:44 -0600
From: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: holt@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
       ptesarik@suse.cz, tee@sgi.com, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@elte.hu,
       linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch V3 0/3] Enable irqs when waiting for rwlocks
Message-ID: <20081203113744.GE8970@sgi.com>
References: <20081104122405.046233722@attica.americas.sgi.com> <20081202161311.ae3376cb.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20081202161311.ae3376cb.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 842
Lines: 18

> It's a bit regrettable to have different architectures behaving in
> different ways.  It would be interesting to toss an x86_64
> implementation into the grinder, see if it causes any problems, see if
> it produces any tangible benefits.  Then other architectures might
> follow.  Or not, depending on the results ;)

I personally expect SGI to work on this for x86_64 in the future.
Once we actually start testing systems with 128 and above cpus, I
would expect to see these performance issues needing to be addressed.
Until then, it is just a theoretical.

Thank you for your help,
Robin Holt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/